Wow, that didn’t take long. I just blasted this guy a few days ago for flinging his feces at his critics. And now he’s flinging more feces at Alison Singer, the former high-ranking member of Autism Speaks, who left out of disgust over their pandering to the anti-vax ground and started her own organization, the Autism Science Foundation.
My sister knows Ms. Singer personally and I briefly got to meet her myself at an autism conference about two weeks ago. But for all Handley’s talk about being sensitive to autism moms and all the “stop attacking the autism moms” rhetoric, Handley proves once again to be a total hypocrite. It’s unacceptable to criticize his organization because they hide behind innocent, well-intentioned parents who have the difficult task of raising autistic children…except when they disagree with him. Then it’s perfectly okay to attack them.
And once again, Handley doesn’t exactly attempt to discuss the actual science of his position. Of course not. He doesn’t understand the science. So he gets his kicks out of just attacking his critics personally like a dirty $cientologist.
Here’s my favorite bit:
Ms. Singer is simply saying things that Paul Offit, Tom Insel, Amy Wallace, Geraldine Dawson, David Gorski, Steven Novella and many other supposedly smart people have also been saying: that “the science has spoken, vaccines do not cause autism.” This makes every single one of them a blazing liar, nothing more.
Wow, isn’t it remarkable that all the actual medical experts somehow agree. What are the odds? It’s almost like they’re examining the same data and arriving at the same undeniable conclusions of that data.
I have written extensively on this hungry lie. ( See Tayloe, Offit, Minshew, Katz, Snyderman, et. al.: Feeding a Hungry Lie and Alison Singer Feeds the Hungry Lie Twice.)
Yes, he has written extensively about this. Only he never manages to properly explain how it’s a lie without making at least a dozen lies himself. Nor does he even entertain the possibility that if the information were hypothetically incorrect as he claims, that maybe the other side is merely in error. Nope. He leaps write into libelous accusations of deliberate falsehood. Classy guy, that J.B. Handley.
Heck, I even created a website, Fourteen Studies to refute the hungry lie with details and show the world how weak the science really is that people like Ms. Singer continually refer to.
Yes, and multiple scientists have illustrated how dishonest that propaganda of yours is: here and here and here.
They also explained the dishonesty of Handely’s response to those refutations here and here.
As I mentioned, the cover of the Wired article says “vaccines don’t cause autism”, which Ms. Wallace repeats throughout her article. And, yet, when pressed to site the specifics of what research has been done, Ms. Wallace herself spells out that only a single vaccine – MMR – has ever been studied for its relationship to autism.
Whether she actually said that or not doesn’t change the fact that every vaccine currently on the market has passed years of clinical testing and the flu vaccine has also been specifically tested as well. Scientists don’t need to waste their lives trying to convince the unconvincible anymore than it’s their job to disprove Santa Claus. It’s the claimant’s job to back up their claim and thus far, you’ve failed to show any real evidence for a link and whenever a claim has been debunked, you’ve simply moved the goalpost. First it was MMR vaccines. Then it was thimerosal. Then it was aluminum. Then it was squalene. Then it was just everything in the vaccines, a perfectly unfalsifiable claim. How did you arrive at the conclusion that the vaccines aren’t safe, J.B.? Do you have special knowledge the rest of the world doesn’t? Does the voice of the god speak to you?
There’s a exhaustive compilation of literature debunking virtually every claim Handley has ever made here.
Let’s look at J.B.’s lies/”mistakes”:
Exactly one vaccine, MMR, has been studied for its relationship to autism.
1. “Safety of Thimerosal-Containing Vaccines: A Two-Phased Study of Computerized Health Maintance Organization Database”
Pediatrics, Thomas Verstraeten, MD (November 2003)
2. “Thimerosal and the Occurrence of Autism: Negative Ecological Evidence from Danish Population-Based Data”
Pediatrics, Kreesten M. Madsen, MD (September 2003)
3. “Continuing Increases in Autism Reported to California’s Developmental Services System”
Archives of General Psychiatry, Robert Schechter, MD (January 2008)
Article relating to Jan. 2008 study “Continuing Increases in Autism Reported to California’s Developmental Services System: Mercury in Retrograde”:
4. “Neuropsychological Performance 10 Years After Immunization in Infancy With Thimerosal-Containing Vaccines”
Pediatrics, Alberto Eugenio Tozzi, Patrizia Bisiacchi (February 2009)
“Nearly 70% of the invited subjects participated in the neuropsychological assessment (N = 1403). Among the 24 neuropsychological outcomes that were evaluated, only 2 were significantly associated with thimerosal exposure. ”
Articles related to thimerosal study above:
5. “Autism and Thimerosal-Containing Vaccines: Lack of Consistent Evidence for an Association”
American Journal of Preventive Medicine, Paul Stehr-Green, DrPh, MPH (August 2003)
6. “Thimerosal Exposure in Infants and Developmental Disorders: A Prospective Cohort Study in the United Kingdom Does Not Support a Causal Association”
Pediatrics, John Heron and Nick Andrews, PhD (September 2004)
7. “Early Thimerosal Exposure and Neuropsychological Outcomes at 7 to 10 Years”
New England Journal of Medicine, Thompson WW et al. (September 27, 2007)
“Our study does not support a causal association between early exposure to mercury from thimerosal-containing vaccines and immune globulins and deficits in neuropsychological functioning at the age of 7 to 10 years.”
Articles related to thimerosal study above:
NY Times – “Vaccine Compound Is Harmless, Study Says, as Autism Debate Rages “ by GARDINER HARRIS
8. “Association Between Thimerosal-Containing Vaccine and Autism”
Journal of the American Medical Association, Anders Hviid, MSc (October 2003)
9. “Mercury concentrations and metabolism in infants receiving vaccines containing thiomersal: A descriptive study”
The Lancet, Michael Pichichero, MD (November 2002)
10. “Thimerosal and Autism?”
Pediatrics, Karen Nelson, MD (March 2003)
11. “Lack of Association Between Rh Status, Rh Immune Globulin in Pregnancy and Autism”
American Journal of Medical Genetics, Judith H. Miles and T. Nicole Takahashi (May 2007)
12. The Rise in Autism and the Role of Age at Diagnosis
“Autism incidence in California shows no sign yet of plateauing.” (Despite the purge of thimerosal in most vaccines seven years earlier)
Articles related to this study:
13. “Blood Mercury Concentrations in CHARGE Study Children with and without Autism”
Environmental Health Perspectives, Irva Hertz-Picciotto, Peter G. Green, Lora Delwiche, Robin Hansen, Cheryl Walker, and Isaac N. Pessah (October 2009)
Articles related to this study:
“Another Study Showing Lack of Correlation Between Mercury and Autism” by Steven Novella
Hmm…Hmm…new science? Like these perhaps:
Mark Blaxill recently reported (HERE):
“A research team led by scientists from the University of Pittsburgh and Thoughtful House reported today that exposure to a birth dose of a hepatitis B vaccine that included an ethyl mercury preservative caused significant delays in the development of several survival reflexes in male rhesus macaque monkeys. The findings were published on line today in the journal Neurotoxicology.[You can purchase the article from Science Direct (HERE).”
Additionally, a recent study published in the journal the Annals of Epidemiology titled “Hepatitis B Vaccination of Male Neonates and Autism” (HERE) found that “Boys who received the hepatitis B vaccine during the first month of life had 2.94 greater odds for ASD [autism] compared to later- or unvaccinated boys.”
Now compare the studies Handley finds so unacceptable to the “studies” Handley finds so compelling:
This is really just a continuation of the first lie Ms. Singer tells, but she builds on the first lie to feign the exasperation many on the other side try to do that vaccines have already been looked at so let’s move on. It is a dishonest whitewash, nothing more.
Again, I invite people to turn to the many, many vaccine studies cited above among many, many others that are easily available. And as Christopher Hitchens says, “What can be asserted without evidence can be just as easily dismissed without evidence.” Handley just says it’s dishonest whitewashing but never explains why that is. He can’t. He knows he can’t. That’s why all he does is climb trees and fling feces at his critics. If he had any real science backing him up, he’d have a Nobel Prize by now and be published in a reputable medical journal by now.
How do we parents ever trust people who will lie so freely and easily about something this important?
We parents? You mean like Alison Singer? Or do you just mean the parents who naively allow you to exploit their plight to bulster your career?